Sunday, March 13, 2011

Of Free Will and the Holism


How the Holism Cares:

Except outside of space-time (perhaps by vibrating or stepping back and forth, between and across, two different kinds of space-time or chronological sequencing?) or, alternatively, only if all of space-time always and already abides (and is simply perpetually recycled through a recurrent context of the Eternal Present) --- how else could the whole entire field of consciousness, as a whole, ever relate to or CARE about ITs constituent parts, as parts, except upon ITself becoming a part --- whereupon IT, by seeming logical necessity, would, paradoxically, no longer be a whole?

Assuming we are not locked into a recycling Eternal Present, then, intuitively, to abide as our Changeless Changer, must the Holism carry some Meta Power, beyond mortal measure or observation, to vibrate or dance back and forth, discretely, between ITs entirety as a field and ITs expression of ITs parts? Must Its manner of relating to us remain beyond our control, replication, and measurable kin, so that IT must remain regressively impossible for us ever to confine the entire universe of ITs expression to any standard model for summing ultimate building blocks of empirically measurable matter, indifferent particles, or elusive Higgs bosons?

Indeed, may such “indifferent particles” as seem to relate to us abide to the field of our perception only as dormant, informational, placeholding aspects of expressions of the Holistic Field? May matter (or substance) simply be the Changeless Changer in an aspect of rest, like information that is abiding in a state of meta inertia?

If so, in what aspects or ways might the Changeless Changer, when alternating to a state of being consciously aware, actively participate in apprehending and therewith guiding how the substance of our relations unfolds within availed degrees of freedom? Perhaps, a mortal may only intuit such a quality of holistic guidance, based on that quality of one’s own consciousness, which is itself beyond being reduced to any empirical formulation.

To a receptive mind, the astonishing synchronicity of a mind boggling array of biological unfoldment suggests that guidance and feedback with such a Holism is a constant, continuous, and fundamental basis for all of moral empathy with fellow perspectives of consciousness. Empathy seems natural. Most people would seem not to deny a spiritual or fundamentally real basis for empathy — unless they are aberrationally taught that empathy should be reserved only for one’s tribe or religion and that empathy in itself has no moral basis — thereby tending to harden them towards becoming unfeeling and isolated egoists or tribal primitives.

*****

How the Holism wills:

The essential aspect about mortal "Will" is not that it is entirely independent or "Free" of the milieu of physical substance and feedback that is interpreted as being "Causal," which is synchronized among all sets, signs, and fluxes of measurable substance.  Rather, the essential aspect about will is that it is Conscious, i.e., that it is somehow availed to be representationally appreciative and receptive, beyond boundaries of any brain, to a dance of measurable feedback between fields and particles --- albeit, not independent of the character of whatever the Implicated Meta Essence out of which arose the point of singularity from which beginning has unfolded the space-time that we experience as our universe.

*****

A "Changeless Changer" requires that quantitative predictability and qualitative will must coextend, each to define the other --- depending on fluxes in purpose, point of view, and frame of reference. Because of their coextensive codependence, neither objectivism nor subjectivism can provide a complete model of either physical or moral reality. Further, every plane upon which objectivism and subjectivism meet will necessarily produce fuzz and uncertainty, because every focus of qualitative perspective with quantitative context is also necessarily changing --- constantly and continuously.


May qualitative Consciousness and quantitative Physical Substance be of a same Meta Essence, receiving their qualitative versus quantitative aspects secondary to the locally fluxing purpose, perspective, and context of the Meta Essence? May substance be a form of consciousness, tending not to be recognized as such insofar as it is morally inactive, indifferent, organizationally unimbued, dormant, undirected, or random? May consciousness be a form of substance, not often treated or recognized as such insofar as it is qualitatively active, caring, continuously changing, morally directed, and defiant of being closely and completely measured?  Intuitively, is there not a holistic, reconciling, meta quality of Consciousness that is beyond the measure of that which we see signed as substantive nature, precisely because Whatever is the superior source of consciousness (moral purposefulness?) is also the superior source of nature?

******

Does our universe, in its quantitative and material aspect, carry any reality that is independent in itself, apart from being represented to the fluxing apprehension of a meta, Changeless Changer? As a measured entity, can the unfolding river of our universe be stepped into twice by any conscious being? Is it fairly implicated to any self aware expression of conscious beingness that whatever may be the source of its consciousness may also be the unchanging source of our measurable universe? If the identity of our universe is only a relational one, inferior to the apprehensions of a meta, Changeless Changer, then is not all that is measurable about our bodies and substance only a representation, sign, or logos of the meta ideas, thoughts, words, apprehensions, emotions, and purposes of the Changeless Changer? May the Changeless Changer, like us, be limited in not having capacity or potential to idealize, apprehend, or relate to thoughts, absent byproduct of representations framed as measurable placeholders (stored consciousness?) in respect of idealizations of particles of points for forming grids in relation to fields?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I would put it thusly: Some are inclined to be ruled, some to rule. But they were not the original stock of America. The original stock was inclined more to independent mindedness and self reliance. Given the wrong stock, all the rules in the world will not convert a sow's ear to a silk stocking. Yes, law and economics can be important factors. However, in themselves, they are NOT determinants. In the mix is needed a quality: the quality of the independent minded citizen. Put that quality in the mix and we can fashion a city on a hill. But that quality is drowned when flooded under unassimilable, codependent types, who abhor independent mindedness and instead must abuse or be abused. Mere reason has little chance for changing people who have been made disposed, under genetics or acculturation from early age, to pre-American modes of feudal codependence. America now finds her education and immigration policies poised to banish self governance, by independent minded people, from Earth. Americans will not reassert their inheritance with mere reason. They will need to be receptive to, and respectful of, a source of higher inspiration. Pray that experience will teach America, and not sink her.